Obama's Afghan Strategy Will Work

Last week, President Obama announced his strategy for pursuing the war in Afghanistan. His objective is to destroy Al Qaeda's ability to function. The idea of creating a democratic bourgeois market-based Afghanistan is off the table now, an idea that failed to recognized that Afghanistan is more a geographical expression than a proper nation-state. It will require US military action in Pakistan's northwestern tribal areas as well, but this approach has the potential to improve US security without putting US troops in an untenable position.

Militarily, this change is a stroke of genius. Before, the US was endeavoring to occupy Afghanistan and engage in nation building efforts using far too few troops and far too little money. It was an effort to do on a shoe-string budget what billions of pounds from the British and billions of rubles from the Soviets failed to do. From now on, the US will be on the offensive, a far less costly effort, forcing Al Qaeda to play defense – something they lack the discipline and firepower to do successfully.

Protecting the Karzai government in Kabul after it came to power almost 7 years ago is not something that the US government must do. Who governs Afghanistan, to the extent that anyone can, is not a matter of US national security. Putting Usama bin Laden's head on the end of a stick is. If the Northern Alliance falls, it is no skin off President Obama's nose. If bin Laden is a free man four years from now, rather than a corpse, Mr. Obama will have some explaining to do.

Moreover, this new strategy will address Pakistan's role in Al Qaeda's rise. Most of the Pakistani military and secret security forces are pro-Al Qaeda. Indeed, some of the funding and operational support for the terrorists comes from the Pakistani security power structure. This is, of course, unacceptable and must be stopped. The only way it will be stopped is by use of US special forces fighting a guerrilla war in Pakistan against Al Qaeda.

This is problematic in that Pakistan's sovereignty will be undermined. At the same time, though, one must ask whether Pakistan's sovereignty actually extends into the tribal areas. Under international law, one of the tests of sovereignty is whether or not a government's writ actually applies in a given area. Recent history suggests that the Pakistani government doesn't have sovereignty over the tribal areas, in which case it has no grounds for complaint when the US Army's Rangers go in to kick Al Qaeda bottoms. In PR terms, it will be a problem, but unless the Pakistani government can bring the region in question under its control, hunting terrorists there becomes fair game for anyone.

The one danger the Obama administration faces is the temptation to go beyond killing bin Laden and getting involved in Afghani nation building and dealing in Pakistani politics. The US needs to remember that the governance of Afghanistan and Pakistan are issues for the locals, and Washington has no interest in taking sides.

© Copyright 2009 by The Kensington Review, Jeff Myhre, PhD, Editor. No part of this publication may be reproduced without written consent. Produced using Fedora Linux.

Kensington Review Home